With a "boxing ring" we may want to have someone moderate them, just as anyone would moderate a professional debate, or a debate with turns. Kind of to keep it on topic... things like ad hominems and things that bring it way off tangent I would think should be moderated. This way the debates remain debates, on topic (as far as applicable) and able to be maintained as such. After all, why create a forum specifically for challenged debates to make them any different than other debates, if they aren't going to remain on topic, moderated and specific.

State topic of debate
State who is debating
Keep debate on topic
Perhaps even have notes or feedback for people after debate is over

(31-10-2012 08:19 PM)Stark Raving Wrote: This thread is for anyone to post in.

Any ideas you have for unique circumstances, ideas for the rules, or specific debate ideas (ie. Hughsie suggested a three person debate etc.) post them here.

This forum section is your chance to lay down some rules for discussions. It's the one place where moderating is used. Use your imagination, and don't be afraid to make suggestions!

I like the idea of there being an alternate thread where readers can post their own reactions and responses to the debate, make suggestions etc.

I don't see why there couldn't be group debates, either with a set number of people participating or even a tag team of rotating master debaters.

I would suggest some sort of time parameters set. There could be different ones. Maybe if there isn't a response in a weeks time it would be a strike, with only 3 strikes making a loss. In such a case there should be allowance for emergencies if agreed upon by the opponent. Another variation might be of shorter or longer duration. There could also be a limit on the amount of time given for the debate so that it doesn't carry on forever.

(31-10-2012 08:24 PM)Logisch Wrote: With a "boxing ring" we may want to have someone moderate them, just as anyone would moderate a professional debate, or a debate with turns. Kind of to keep it on topic... things like ad hominems and things that bring it way off tangent I would think should be moderated. This way the debates remain debates, on topic (as far as applicable) and able to be maintained as such. After all, why create a forum specifically for challenged debates to make them any different than other debates, if they aren't going to remain on topic, moderated and specific.

State topic of debate
State who is debating
Keep debate on topic
Perhaps even have notes or feedback for people after debate is over

I already stated that this would be a moderated forum. I would be that moderator. But only to keep this on topic. For things like logical fallacies, that's up to the debaters to point out. I'm not after a formal debate section so much as a section where we can have one on one discussions so they don't get sidetracked and trolled.

That said, of you wanted to host a formal debate, I'm all for it. Notes at the end and all. I'll do any modding you need, ie deletions, and you can host it however you like. (turn based, no fallacies, limited post length....whatever you choose)

You could even start a thread as the "host" and invite two other members to debate your topic.

(31-10-2012 08:19 PM)Stark Raving Wrote: This thread is for anyone to post in.

Any ideas you have for unique circumstances, ideas for the rules, or specific debate ideas (ie. Hughsie suggested a three person debate etc.) post them here.

This forum section is your chance to lay down some rules for discussions. It's the one place where moderating is used. Use your imagination, and don't be afraid to make suggestions!

I like the idea of there being an alternate thread where readers can post their own reactions and responses to the debate, make suggestions etc.

I don't see why there couldn't be group debates, either with a set number of people participating or even a tag team of rotating master debaters.

I would suggest some sort of time parameters set. There could be different ones. Maybe if there isn't a response in a weeks time it would be a strike, with only 3 strikes making a loss. In such a case there should be allowance for emergencies if agreed upon by the opponent. Another variation might be of shorter or longer duration. There could also be a limit on the amount of time given for the debate so that it doesn't carry on forever.

Lots of good ideas in there! But too many rules in general may make things really restrictive. How bout, for now, until we all get a feel for how this section will work, any specific rules like time limits, more than two debaters etc. can be added in the initial post/invitation.

(31-10-2012 08:27 PM)Logisch Wrote: If people can debate in a manner that is without insult, discontent and mannerisms that are full of ridicule, debates can be productive and helpful. Never know, a person may learn something too.

Maybe there could be formal and informal debates. I myself tend to enjoy a down and dirty beat 'em about the head and face match from time to time. It is a boxing ring, after all, not a debate hall or ballerina.

(31-10-2012 08:27 PM)Logisch Wrote: But that depends on the masterdebater.